1. Field of the Invention
The subject ergonomic apparatus for stabilizing support of portable video devices is generally directed to an apparatus to which a video camera or other such video device may be mounted for use. More specifically, the ergonomic support apparatus is one which provides a structure that effectively dampens potential image-shaking forces to which a portable video device may otherwise be vulnerable to. The subject apparatus provides such in an ergonomic structure which eases fatigue and strain normally associated with prolonged periods of portable video device operation.
With the rapid development of video technology, the prevalence of increasingly compact yet high image quality video capture/recording devices has steadily grown in recent years. Devices such as mini digital video (DV) cameras and the like adapted literally for ‘handheld’ operation have become quite commonplace. The advancements in video technology enable the images acquired by even such highly compact devices to rival in quality those acquired by more substantial and costly professional models. The very compactness which makes them so attractive to many a user, however, also makes them vulnerable to excessive instability in the captured video.
That they are lightweight and compact allows such devices to be easily carried and used often by simply holding in the palm of one's hand. While the inherent advantages of such portability and convenient utility are many, the captured video often suffers from excessive shaking or shuttering movement which most viewers would find highly bothersome. Even in the steadiest of hands, the inherent image instability—especially where the video was captured while moving to follow the action—is at best distracting, and usually quite dizzying.
Despite this, not all perceivable movement in video images is necessarily undesirable. In video images captured, for instance, by much larger and bulkier broadcast camera devices of the type employed for direct-feed broadcast applications, for instance, the image movements appear in significantly more dampened form to the user. They are far less shaky or trembly than comparable images captured using more compact devices, noticeably so to most. Even when the video is captured while moving to follow the action, the resulting image movements are closer to those of natural eye perception when viewed live. Hence, the images captured by these cameras of substantial size and mass are typically quite tolerable, and often even desirable for their realistic, live view effect.
Electronic image stabilization and other such remedial techniques are known in the art to address to the image shaking problem in compact video devices. Such known techniques, however, are of limited effectiveness. Many even impair portions of the images for the sake of stabilization, yet fail to provide adequate improvement. Individuals who are even the most moderate visual perception will readily discern images captured using compact handheld-type devices from images captured using more substantial devices as broadcast video cameras and the like.
Another drawback of compact portable video devices is found in the very fact that they are handheld when operating. They may of course be mounted to a tripod or other support, but doing so severely restricts the user's mobility. Maximum flexibility of use, therefore, requires that the video device be held by the user so that it may be dynamically relocated and re-oriented as necessary. This presents a problem for prolonged periods of use, as the user must often hold the video device by hand at approximately eye level for the entire duration. It does not take long for fatigue to set in.
Additionally, such video devices are often configured to be held by either the right hand or the left hand (usually the right), so the user cannot readily transfer the device from one hand to the other during operation. The same hand must continue to hold the device exclusively.
Also a factor is the obstructed access to the video device's full range of controls. Many manufacturers distribute the device's various controls over virtually of all available sides of the device to maximize its compactness. During handheld operation, then, the user is able to actually access only those controls not covered by the palm of the device-holding hand. While this may be acceptable for most modes of operation, it is hardly acceptable where the more sophisticated features of the video device are to be invoked. The controls required for such features are infrequently used and therefore usually placed at those portions least accessible during device operation; hence it may be a very difficult, if not impossible, a task to get at the required combinations of controls—at least to do so without pausing the device's operation and setting it down for access.
There is therefore a need for an apparatus whereby the shaking, trembling, vibratory, or other such undesirable movements otherwise perceivable in video images captured by a device are alleviated. There is a need for such apparatus by which the fatigue on the user during prolonged periods of user-carried operation is also alleviated. There is a need, moreover, for such apparatus whereby a user may conveniently and quite effortlessly manipulate the video device and have ready access to the full range of its controls without interrupting operation.
2. Prior Art
User-carried assemblies for supporting video devices are known in the art. The best prior art known to Applicant includes U.S. Pat. Nos. 7,128,354; 6,929,409; 6,652,431; 6,149,112; 5,890,025; 5,650,821; 5,435,515; 5,243,370; 4,976,387; 4,967,282; 4,963,904; 4,943,820; 3,332,593; 2,658,435; 2,603,134. A number of known assemblies employ a rig or other support structure having a rigid arm that provides canti-levered support for a device mount against the user's body. These and other known support structures, however, lack the combination of ergonomic support and video image stabilizing features realized by the subject ergonomic apparatus for stabilized support of portable video devices.